PDA

View Full Version : Submit a comment (if you can)!!



CP/M User
June 14th, 2008, 02:27 PM
I seriously hate people who simply say "Why Bother?", though I'm becoming one myself by saying Why Bother trying to enter a comment on a Website when it's gonna be rejected. These sites seem to be everywhere, the Turbo Pascal 3 website with that awful person continuously promoting Turbo Pascal 5.5 on it and now I found a Media website which don't allow for comments. Most of the time it's the "idiots" which get their comments on page and if you have something important to say, then it either gets deleted or doesn't get submitted! In this instance there's no comments on this media website, though I did have one posted there and was just recently deleted - I mean stuff them I got a Blog on the issue which is one of the few which comes up in Google when you type in the name of the Reserve - I just thought it would be nice to tie the two together so people know! :-o

Does anyone know of a good website forum which allows you to submit comments til the cows come home. It would be good if it was a media based ranting forum which allows you to rant about the media til the cows come home. Guess a good name for it would be "You can't handle the Truth!"

Trixter
June 16th, 2008, 12:53 PM
the Turbo Pascal 3 website with that awful person continuously promoting Turbo Pascal 5.5 on it

A really quick way to quell all those 5.5 arguments is to remind people that your target platform is CP/M, and 3.0 was the last version released for CP/M. That should pretty much shut people up.

If your target platform is not CP/M, then I have to agree with the other guys; 7.0 is a better compiler and IDE in every single way than 3.0.

Jorg
June 16th, 2008, 01:42 PM
A really quick way to quell all those 5.5 arguments is to remind people that your target platform is CP/M, and 3.0 was the last version released for CP/M. That should pretty much shut people up.

If your target platform is not CP/M, then I have to agree with the other guys; 7.0 is a better compiler and IDE in every single way than 3.0.

Yes. But I have only 128K ram..

Trixter
June 16th, 2008, 05:32 PM
Yes. But I have only 128K ram..

Then use your favorite editor and compile with tpc.exe (although I show it uses 99KB RAM). And if you don't have enough RAM for that, then tell people you only have 128K RAM and that's why you're using TP 3.0. No ranting needed :-)

CP/M User
June 17th, 2008, 02:03 AM
Trixter wrote:

A really quick way to quell all those 5.5 arguments is to remind people that your target platform is CP/M, and 3.0 was the last version released for CP/M. That should pretty much shut people up.

Yes easier said than done when you cannot submit a comment stating those facts about CP/M.

I wonder though, was CP/M Plus the last version of CP/M made? Perhaps on an 8bit platform it would have been, though there were other forms of CP/M on different platforms and DOS Plus 1.2 which could run CP/M-86 CMD files as well as a CP/M made for 386 platform - though I've never seen it and I'm not even sure it's available on the Internet.

If your target platform is not CP/M, then I have to agree with the other guys; 7.0 is a better compiler and IDE in every single way than 3.0.

Yes perhaps, though you'd me amazed what you can do with TP 3 at the same time! :-o

It's my understanding that Turbo Pascal 3 will work with CP/M v2.2 and there are some Z80 instructions compiled in the programs - so it needs a Z80 processor, though I've working with it in 64k of memory!

Later versions of TP may have some cool routines included with it, though what gets me is the size of the compiled programs which TP 3 produces, terrible.

Trixter
June 18th, 2008, 05:53 AM
Trixter wrote:

A really quick way to quell all those 5.5 arguments is to remind people that your target platform is CP/M, and 3.0 was the last version released for CP/M. That should pretty much shut people up.

Yes easier said than done when you cannot submit a comment stating those facts about CP/M.

That doesn't make any sense. What is preventing you from writing about CP/M?



If your target platform is not CP/M, then I have to agree with the other guys; 7.0 is a better compiler and IDE in every single way than 3.0.

Yes perhaps, though you'd me amazed what you can do with TP 3 at the same time! :-o


Not really. Any TP3 program you can show me, it will compile smaller and faster with TP7. I mean, sure, making .COM files is a neat trick, but the stub is 10K whereas the stub with a typical TP7 program is 2K (or 4K if you use the CRT unit).

CP/M User
June 18th, 2008, 11:07 PM
Trixter wrotee:

That doesn't make any sense. What is preventing you from writing about CP/M?

I had to write about it here instead on their comments page which wasn't excepting any new comments and is contining to show older comments which I made another rant about on this forum, make sense now!

Not really. Any TP3 program you can show me, it will compile smaller and faster with TP7. I mean, sure, making .COM files is a neat trick, but the stub is 10K whereas the stub with a typical TP7 program is 2K (or 4K if you use the CRT unit).

Well obviously you haven't been checking out the programming section, I've started a thread there where I was trying to understand the code generated from TP3 and dissecting routines from a program I generated with the aim of compiling a smaller program. The TP3 library IS the one of the limitations with TP3 yes, it's not very good at calculations as well I'll say that plus TP4 onwards incorporates some very quick INCrements and DECrements with variables - that's why it's better to have Arrays.

Trixter
June 20th, 2008, 10:45 AM
Well obviously you haven't been checking out the programming section, I've started a thread there where I was trying to understand the code generated from TP3 and dissecting routines from a program I generated with the aim of compiling a smaller program. The TP3 library IS the one of the limitations with TP3 yes, it's not very good at calculations as well I'll say that plus TP4 onwards incorporates some very quick INCrements and DECrements with variables - that's why it's better to have Arrays.

I know very much about the internals of how Turbo Pascal 7 creates compiled code, including optimizations. If you have a thread somewhere else where you are asking questions, let me know and I'll check it out.

CP/M User
June 20th, 2008, 11:37 PM
Trixter wrote:

I know very much about the internals of how Turbo Pascal 7 creates compiled code, including optimizations. If you have a thread somewhere else where you are asking questions, let me know and I'll check it out.

Well I should tell you that the other thread (http://www.vintage-computer.com/vcforum/showthread.php?t=10856) I've created is related towards the Code Generation produced by Turbo Pascal 3 and the questions I've set aside in that Thread relate to the segments of Code which TP3 generates before running the program.

Unless anyone has any knowledge of building a Turbo Pascal compiler which can optimise code generated in CP/M that would be fantastic! The only other way I know around is to Disassemble COM files and interpret the Library routines my programs uses to generate small code. I have done this already though in a highly restricted sense where I didn't need the Library at all to run a program and coded it back into Assembly!